Search

Begin New Search Content Type Policy Brief

1. What Happens If the United States Leaves the WTO?

Author:
James Bacchus
Publication Date:
06-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Aresolution before Congress calls for US withdrawal from the World Trade Organization (WTO). Both international law and US law permit withdrawal. The case for withdrawal, however, is misguided and misinformed. Much of what is said and widely believed about the effects of WTO membership on the United States is simply untrue. In fact, American membership in the WTO has been for decades and remains today enormously beneficial economically to US businesses, workers, and consumers. Withdrawal by the United States from the WTO would result in the loss of many of these economic benefits, including those derived from decades of accumulated trade commitments made by the 165 other member countries on thousands of different US goods and services traded within the WTO legal framework; those resulting from the commercial shield of WTO rules forbidding trade discrimination against US exports; and those emanating from the availability to the United States of an impartial, binding, and enforceable system of WTO trade dispute settlement. Moreover, withdrawal by the United States would cede US leadership in the WTO to other leading trading countries, including the second-largest trading country in the world, China. Trade is a win-win economically for all WTO members. WTO membership maximizes the overall economic gains from engaging in trade. The United States should remain in the WTO and help lead it toward needed reforms that will make it more beneficial to all in the modern global economy of the 21st century.
Topic:
Economics, Geopolitics, Trade, and WTO
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

2. The New Development Bank’s Contribution to the Energy Transition Process in the BRICS Countries (2016-2023)

Author:
Maria Elena Rodriguez, Rafaela Mello Rodrigues de Sá, Octávio Henrique Alves Costa de Oliveira, and Renan Guimarães Canellas de Oliveira
Publication Date:
12-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
BRICS Policy Center
Abstract:
Considering the growing relevance of the Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) in the task of financing the global energy transition process, it is important to understand the efforts of these institutions to establish projects aimed at reducing carbon emissions in the most diverse sectors of the economy, and especially in the energy sector. This document looks specifically at the role that the New Development Bank (NDB) plays in this process, presenting an overview of its loan portfolio and targets in terms of contributions to the energy transition process. The NDB, also known as the BRICS Bank, stands out in its institutional strategies in the area of Clean Energy, one of its operational objectives, setting a target for the year 2026 of directing 40% of all its financing to projects aimed at climate change, including operations that contribute to the energy transition (NDB, 2022a, p. 28).
Topic:
Development, Banks, BRICS, Energy Transition, and Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs)
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Iran, Indonesia, India, South Africa, Brazil, Ethiopia, Egypt, and United Arab Emirates

3. Taking Stock of Brexit

Author:
Iain Begg
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
LSE IDEAS
Abstract:
J ohn Curtice, the UK’s foremost polling expert, wrote recently that ‘politicians do not talk much about Brexit these days’ (Curtice, 2025). In Germany, too, Brexit has largely disappeared from view, according to a prominent journalist consulted in the preparation of this blog. Another expert, Anand Menon, told AP News on the fifth anniversary of the UK leaving the EU that Brexit had ‘changed our economy’, adding that ‘our politics has been changed quite fundamentally’ (Lawless, 2025). His view is that, in electoral politics, conventional political cleavages have been supplanted by ‘a new division around Brexit’ (Lawless, 2025). In much of the EU, the 2025 anniversary elicited many articles characterised by a combination of acknowledgment that Brexit had failed to deliver, resignation about the UK’s fate and a sense of growing disinterest. The Austrian newspaper Kourier summed up these sentiments: “Von skurril bis tragisch: Eine Bilanz nach fünf Jahren Brexit [From bizarre to tragic, a stocktake after five years of Brexit]” (Bauer, 2025). However, Brexit is a process, rather than a discrete event, and some of its effects are both contested and take time, and are often seen through ideological rather than analytic lenses. A useful way to assess its consequences is to distinguish between three key dimensions: economic, social and governance related. The overall economic effects of Brexit have mainly been negative on both sides of the English Channel, albeit uneven, although some critics regard the magnitudes as having been exaggerated.
Topic:
European Union, Economy, Brexit, and Domestic Politics
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

4. Energy Data Spaces and Market Power: a new challenge for data sovereignty and its governance

Author:
Emanuele Giovannetti
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
LSE IDEAS
Abstract:
This paper examines how the digitalisation of energy markets, driven by smart meter data and Energy Data Spaces, is reshaping competition in retail electricity services. It analyses the implications for market power, consumer outcomes, and data sovereignty, highlighting the regulatory challenges posed by data-driven business models that operate across national boundaries.
Topic:
Markets, Governance, Regulation, Digitalization, and Energy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

5. Adapting Benin’s Battle with Violent Militant Groups

Author:
Anouar Boukhars
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Africa Center for Strategic Studies
Abstract:
Persistent militant Islamist group attacks in the northern border regions of Benin have posed a growing security threat to the coastal West African region. Benin has made noteworthy institutional reforms to strengthen its defense and security forces. Yet, accelerated and refocused training is needed to translate this into more adaptive, operational capabilities to effectively counter the militant insurgency. Empowering local commanders, pairing enhanced force mobility with strike capability, and fusing interagency intelligence sharing are priority operational adaptations needed to sustain pressure on the insurgents. Effective counterinsurgency in northern Benin requires operationalizing a population-centric protection model and ethos embedded within the defense and security forces.
Topic:
Governance, Reform, Islamism, and Instability
Political Geography:
Africa and Benin

6. The means of prediction and the production function of AI

Author:
Maximilian Kasy
Publication Date:
02-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Economics for Inclusive Prosperity (EfIP)
Abstract:
The real AI governance challenge: Who gets to decide what AI systems optimize for? Current debates miss that AI conflicts are between different groups of people, not humans vs. machines. Power flows from control of AI inputs: Those who control the means of prediction (data, computing power, expertise, and energy) determine AI objectives. Current governance approaches fail: Individual privacy rights and market mechanisms can’t address AI’s collective harms and benefits. Democratic control is the solution: Give stakeholders affected by AI decisions a voice in setting AI objectives.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Governance, Regulation, Privacy, Artificial Intelligence, and Prediction
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. How the EU can pursue strategic cooperation on secondary raw materials with the Western Balkans

Author:
Edoardo Righetti, Deniz Tekin, and Vasileios Rizos
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
Europe’s green and digital transitions are increasing demand for critical raw materials (CRMs), just as geopolitical risks and trade tensions are reshaping global supply chains. In recent years, the EU has taken steps to secure and diversify supplies through building strategic partnerships with resource-rich countries, which also includes recovering CRMs from mine waste and tailings. The Western Balkans region stands out as a natural partner, given their already close integration with EU markets and transport networks, and their legacy of old industrial sites and mine tailings. Such a partnership could lead to several mutual benefits – for the EU, more resilient and circular CRM value chains which correspond with its strategic autonomy and sustainability objectives, and for the Western Balkans, by rehabilitating legacy sites and advancing green and circular policies tied to the Green Agenda and the enlargement framework. This CEPS Policy Brief dives into three priority areas for EU-Western Balkans cooperation on secondary raw materials that policymakers should pay more attention to.
Topic:
Regional Cooperation, European Union, Supply Chains, Green Transition, Digital Transition, and Critical Minerals
Political Geography:
Europe and Western Balkans

8. Restraint and Diplomacy in Arctic Policy: Cooperation Amid U.S.-Russia-China Tensions

Author:
Pavel Devyatkin
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
In recent years, the Arctic has become the site of both great-power cooperation and competition. While the 2025 Alaska summit between Presidents Putin and Trump reflected a thaw in U.S.–Russia relations, U.S. interest in acquiring Greenland has cast doubt on continued U.S. cooperation with both Russia and China in the region. This brief details how a combination of restraint and proactive diplomacy in the Arctic — built upon shared interests and a recognition of competitive coexistence — will best serve the United States. The second Trump administration has called for American Arctic dominance, viewing the region as an energy source and as an opportunity to monopolize resources and to establish its Western Hemisphere force posture. Russia views the Arctic through a similar lens of resources and sovereignty, as it ramps up its military presence while intensifying efforts to extract natural resources. China’s influence in the region has steadily increased, as it collaborates with Russia, while advancing scientific research, sustainable development, and multilateral climate cooperation. The United States has come to see increasing Russia–China collaboration in the Arctic as a threat to U.S. national interests. But rather than responding to this deepening relationship through unilateralism, the U.S. should recognize that competitive coexistence and trilateral cooperation are more beneficial. This approach avoids zero-sum confrontation and minimizes accidental escalation while maintaining U.S. force projection, maximizing resource extraction, and promoting scientific collaboration. Toward this end, this brief recommends that the Trump administration: Establish trilateral maritime safety and search-and-rescue, SAR, operations, a system that exchanges real-time information, conducts joint training exercises, and invests in port and coast guard infrastructure. Such cooperation would lower shipping costs, improve safety, and encourage economic development — goals shared by the United States, Russia, and China. Institutionalize direct, reliable U.S.–Russia–China communication channels, including a dedicated Arctic hotline for incident reporting and a security digital platform for real-time vessel tracking. Such transparency minimizes the chances of miscalculation, particularly with nuclear assets in the region. Revitalize the Arctic Council to enable communication among the three major powers, the eight Arctic states, and Indigenous representatives. Initiate a trilateral arms control framework, using reductions in Arctic military exercises as a springboard for broader arms control and security arrangements.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Strategic Competition, and Great Powers
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Asia, North America, Arctic, and United States of America

9. Prospects and Problems for Reinvigorating Superpower Nuclear Cooperation

Author:
Ariel Petrovics
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
A three-way nuclear arms race between the United States, China, and Russia looms — an escalation that would erode global nonproliferation and usher in an era of unchecked nuclear proliferation. This brief offers a path to preventing this destabilizing outcome through pragmatic nuclear cooperation — an approach that has strong historical precedent and accords with the strategic interests of all three nuclear superpowers. Superpower cooperation historically underpinned the global nuclear nonproliferation regime, but increasing great power competition erodes this entire system of international security. China and Russia have each modernized and expanded their nuclear programs and adopted more aggressive nuclear postures. The United States, in turn, has approved a nearly $2 trillion nuclear modernization program. This burgeoning arms race heightens risks of inadvertent escalation, as each of the superpowers become increasingly reliant on nuclear brinkmanship to hold off the growing capabilities of their adversaries. The deteriorating nuclear security environment places pressure on other states to similarly seek their own nuclear arsenals while weakening the nonproliferation tool kit that previously prevented these states from breaking out. As more armed states join the fray, they in turn multiply the number of potential nuclear flashpoints around the world. Reinvesting in superpower cooperation on nuclear security is not an idealistic bid for goodwill. Rather, halting unchecked competition is a pragmatic strategy that serves the interests of the United States, Russia, and China. It preserves a global nuclear system that has safeguarded the superpowers’ dominance for decades. Weakening it, on the other hand, undermines the international marketplace that has preserved U.S. dominance in private industry and innovation. Russia and China, in turn, risk a multifront nuclear competition, as proximate U.S. allies choose uncontrolled independent arsenals over existing security umbrellas. The superpowers can still step back from the abyss by reviving nuclear cooperation. Toward that objective, this brief recommends that the Trump administration: Accept Russia’s offer to extend New START for a year, paired with verification pathways and transparency measures. Reinvigorate existing direct lines of communication (i.e., hotline systems) with both Russia and China. Initiate trilateral nuclear discussions with Russia and China toward the goal of capping arsenals at parity on specific warheads and delivery systems.
Topic:
Security, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, Nonproliferation, and Great Powers
Political Geography:
Russia, China, and United States of America

10. Necessary Neighbors: Poland and Ukraine Must Stabilize Their Strained Partnership

Author:
Yuliia Korotia
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:
Since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, Polish-Ukrainian relations have moved from a phase of exceptional solidarity to one of mounting tension and deepening structural strain. What initially seemed to be a long-term strategic partnership grounded in shared security interests has evolved into a more fragmented and fragile, at times almost hostile, relationship. This shift, visible across political, economic, and social dimensions, risks undermining not only bilateral cooperation but also the broader foundations of regional stability at a moment of ongoing war, strategic uncertainty in Europe, and a potentially antagonistic transatlantic relationship. If Poland and Ukraine fail to adopt a more realistic, constructive, and mutually attentive approach to the partnership, their cooperation will weaken in ways that directly affect military logistics, EU cohesion, regional resilience, and resistance to hybrid threats. Understanding how the relationship has changed, and what deeper dynamics are driving this, is essential for assessing the risks ahead and identifying pathways to improve the relationship.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, European Union, Russia-Ukraine War, and Strategic Partnerships
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, and Poland